Generally described, a communications network, such as a security-monitoring network, can often utilize a variety of devices within the network. For example, a security-monitoring network can include image capture monitoring devices, motion detection monitoring devices, loudspeaker output devices, and the like. Often, to manipulate a particular device, or obtain data from the device, the device requires some form of control/instruction from a proprietary user interface and/or proprietary protocol. For example, video camera manufacturers typically utilize proprietary protocols to govern control of both the mechanical features (pan, tilt, zoom, etc.) and electronic features (electronic shutter speed, etc.). Moreover, a single manufacturer may utilize different protocols for the different model devices or even different versions of the same model of device.
In one embodiment, in the event a network supports multiple networked devices, an authorized user within the network can utilize each individual manufacturer-provided user interface, such as a proprietary graphical user interface, to communicate with the respective hardware device. However, as the number of devices connected to the network increases, maintaining each user interface becomes problematic. For example, a user, such as a security monitor, must receive training and be proficient in each type of proprietary user interface. Additionally, the size and/or usability of a central control panel, such as a computer display screen, having each user interface can become burdensome. Still further, the ability of a user to implement a common task, such as the activation of all the cameras, must be executed individually, one interface at a time.
In another embodiment, a network can attempt to implement a reduced number of device interfaces by incorporating a common user interface template, such as a common graphical user interface, in which each instance of a user interface is configured with the particular communication protocols of a selected hardware device. Although this conventional approach attempts to mitigate the number of the interfaces a monitor would be required to learn, this approach can remain deficient for a number of reasons. In one aspect, the customized user interface for each device remains resident within the memory of the monitor's computer. Accordingly, non-authorized users may gain access to networked devices by accessing the resident user interface on the monitor's computer. In another aspect, because the custom user interfaces are resident on the client computer, the monitor is limited to either utilizing the same computer system for all device controls or to loading and maintaining the custom user interfaces on multiple computing devices. Additionally, the monitor may often be required to upgrade, or otherwise maintain, each instance of the user interface in the event the template is modified in any manner.
In still further aspect, the addition or modification of one or more devices within the network can create a need to delete some or all of the custom user interfaces on each computer maintained by the monitor. Similarly, if a monitor were to only require access to a networked device one time, the monitor would still be required to load and store the custom configured user interface for that device on the user computer. In still a further aspect, a user, such as a monitor, may often have to manipulate multiple instances of the same user interface to control multiple networked devices at one time. Accordingly, the conventional common template approach remains deficient in requiring repeated actions, or the management of multiple interfaces at one time.
Based on the above-described deficiencies, there is a need for a system and method for implementing common user interface for supporting different hardware device protocols in a network.